Grifols (GRF): siguiendo de cerca la acción

Sorpresa, Kintbury sigue subiendo la apuesta

lógicamente si sólo se vende IG, no hay apalancamiento operativo. Pero se supone que ahora disponen del plasma egipcio baratito.
Aparte de estas notas negativas de los analistas, yo creo que le afecta el ambiente de que se espera una inflación más alta y tipos de interés más elevados, con tanta deuda, y que los gobiernos no autoricen subidas de precios de los medicamentos -o espérate que no se los bajen incluso- para paliar el dinero que van a tener que dedicar a ayudas al gasóleo y los alimentos.

Le afecta que pocos institucionales entrarán mientras tengan ese entramado mafioso con el tunneling.

Entonces queda en manos de fondos bajistas que son los que mueven la acción a su antojo.

comentarios de Morningstar en una nota sobre CSL respecto a las alternativas al plasma:


"One major threat to plasma products is recombinant products. Recombinants are quickly replacing plasma products in haemophilia treatment despite being more expensive. CSL has an excellent R&D track record and has developed recombinant products for haemophilia. However, we expect modest revenue growth in the haemophilia segment based on competitor Roche’s recombinant Hemlibra.
Immunoglobulin product sales are key to CSL. The use of immunoglobulins is currently growing due to improved diagnosis, rising affordability, and gaining approval for increased indications. CSL and competitors are pursuing R&D in Fc receptor-targeting therapyto treat autoimmune diseases.
However, gene therapy represents the biggest risk to the plasma industry as it aims to cure rather than treat diseases. While the potentially prohibitive cost may result in slow adoption, CSL has strategically expanded its scope via the acquisition of Calimmune in fiscal 2018 and licensing a late-stage Haemophilia B gene therapy, Hemgenix, from UniQure in fiscal 2020.
.....
CSL spends roughly 9% of its revenue on R&D compared with competitor Grifols’ 6% and benefits from a wide and diverse product portfolio with multiple key products in each segment. CSL has also expanded its R&D pipeline beyond plasma
therapies, including recombinant products and gene therapies, thus mitigating some risk from
changing market dynamics.
While we think it’s unlikely that emerging gene therapies and alternative recombinant therapeutics will cause significant disruption in the next decade, these potential threats still preclude us from assigning the CSL Behring division a wide moat. Gene therapies aim to cure underlying diseases that are currently being treated on an ongoing basis with plasma products. However, as gene therapies are only suitable to treat genetic disorders, the potential impact is limited to the primary immunodeficiency, or PID, portion of CSL’s immunoglobulin business, haemophilia, and hereditary angioedema, or HAE, which together made up roughly 30% of fiscal 2020 revenue. Within PIDs, which made up roughly 12% of group revenue in fiscal 2020, there are over 350 chronic indications being treated by immunoglobulins.
The most common is CVID, which we estimate to be 20% of PIDs. Potential new therapies would likely need to be individually developed for each disease type, with channel checks suggesting gene therapy for PIDs being particularly difficult given the range of genetic defects identified and possible mutations.
Gene therapies targeting PIDs or HAE are very early in clinical stages. Gene therapies within
haemophilia are a more near-term threat, but the segment is also a relativelysmall 12% of group
revenue. In addition, the exorbitant cost of currently approved gene therapies treating other medical conditions indicates that fast widespread adoption is unlikely. Moreover, CSL itself is investing in R&D and gene therapies and signed a licence agreement with uniQure for haemophilia B gene therapy Hemgenix, which launched in fiscal 2024. CSL is also researching gene therapies for a few PIDs, including Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome, but clinical trials are still in early phases.
Firms such as argenx are treating a subset of autoimmune diseases with Fc receptor-targeting
alternatives that offer significantly reduced dosage. Accordingly, we forecast CSL’s immunoglobulins revenue growth to slow, but overall think CSL will be largely undisrupted. First, the potential diseases these recombinant therapeutics can treat account for roughly 38% of CSL’s immunoglobulins revenue, or 15% of group revenue. We think CSL will still be left with significant demand remaining when the diagnosis and range of secondary immunodeficiency indications continue to expand. CSL is also in partnership with Momenta for its own Fc receptor products that are also in clinical trials. Finally, the commercial success and long-term safety and effectiveness of these products are largely unproven. Notall patients are responsive to this alternative therapy, the dosage is still relatively high for recombinants, and competitors would need to compete with physicians already experienced with CSL’s proven products."

Eso refuerza lo que digo, hace 5 años en este foro y hablando con vosotros, nadie hablaba de que hubiese soluciones razonables a los sustitutivos del plasma, 5 años despues tenemos a CSL uno de los mas grandes del mundo, reconociendo publicamente que aun que el mercado de inmonoglubinas es amplio y complejo, ya hay potencialmente tratamientos genicos que podrian resolver el 30% de la demanda actual, cuando avancen las fases y se aprueben en algun momento, pese a sus precios (*ahora hablaremos mas adelante de eso). 

La fortaleza de CSL es la diversificacion de productos, frente a Grifols, por tanto, una simple investigacion o mejora en biologicos que ya existen hoy en dia (sustitutivos del plasma, que no inmunoglubinas artificiales) va a afectar sustancialmente a la accion, que a CSL, y mas cuando Grifols esta tan endeudada, movimientos simples de los precios, o de los mercados o competidors, puede afectar sustancialmente a la valoracion final por apalancamiento financiero. Luego hablan del I+D, CSL se permite el lujo del 9% mientras Grifols del 6% en inversion sobre tratamientos y mejoras que podrian hacerte perdurar, pero Grifols ahora no puede ajustar tanto sus margenes porque tiene que pagar la deuda y comprar supuestos centros que yo en mi opinion no lo van a hacer... (y solo con tratamientos solucionadores, no con biologicos sustitutivos mas baratos, ni competencia china)

Y por ultimo (*lo que te dije arriba que vamos a hablar) .. Ahora esas terapias genicas son caras, pero cuando su patente terminen, seran significamente mas baratas, y las patentes se terminan cuando se presentan la solicitud, no en aprobacion clinica... eso pasa con los medicamentos para adelgazar, ahora son carisimos, (300€ - 450€ al mes, depende de la dosis, solo en España), cuando sean genericos cairan a 30€ o menos... haran que una enorme cantidad de la poblacion deje temporalmente de ser obesa..., eso repercute en las valoraciones de todo, hasta de Nestle. No es ninguna broma, estudios determinan que las personas que toman antagonistas GLP-1, reducen su ticket de compra promedio en un 5% y un 6%

Como anécdota, está semana gym group, cadena de gimnasios británica,  en la conferencia de analistas señalaba que en los sondeos entre sus monitores le confirman que cada vez tienen más usuarios que están tomando glp-1, ponían números. Lo que pierden Nestlé, PepsiCo y demás lo ganan ellos